Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Wal-Mart robbery: Criminal mind v. armed citizen's viewpoint

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,863

    Post imported post


  2. #2
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043

    Post imported post

    Once again, good article Dave. It will be interesting to see where this case goes, and what effects it will have on the view of LAC who carry for protection of self and others.

    Although it has been pointed out that this crime happened so fast that no LAC could possibly have reacted in time to prevent it, let it not be forgotten that this could have turned into a much worse situation should the assailants have decided to open fire on any "witnesses" or decided that the bag of money they had murdered an innocent man for, just wasn't enough.

    There is a good reason crimes like these have a tendency to be "hit and run" as it were. Not so much for fear that the cops might show up to "foil the plot" but with knowledge that we as Americans are known to be armed, and you never know who in the crowd will shoot back given half the chance.

    Its been said before, but I will say it again. By and large, criminals are cowards at their core, and this case proves it yet once again.

    We carry not just for the dozens of scenarios we can think of, but for the hundreds of scenarios we cannot.

  3. #3
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    FMCDH wrote:
    Although it has been pointed out that this crime happened so fast that no LAC could possibly have reacted in time to prevent it, let it not be forgotten that this could have turned into a much worse situation should the assailants have decided to open fire on any "witnesses" or decided that the bag of money they had murdered an innocent man for, just wasn't enough.
    Another thing to tease out of this brutal killing by Calvin Finley is that his methodology for killing the guard would also work for any other visibly armed person, such as a LACOCer out in public.

    An unhesitating, surprising, direct and vicious attack atface to face rangelike Finley used will take out an OCer. (Or a CCer for that matter.)

  4. #4
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    FMCDH wrote:
    Although it has been pointed out that this crime happened so fast that no LAC could possibly have reacted in time to prevent it, let it not be forgotten that this could have turned into a much worse situation should the assailants have decided to open fire on any "witnesses" or decided that the bag of money they had murdered an innocent man for, just wasn't enough.
    Another thing to tease out of this brutal killing by Calvin Finley is that his methodology for killing the guard would also work for any other visibly armed person, such as a LACOCer out in public.

    An unhesitating, surprising, direct and vicious attack atface to face rangelike Finley used will take out an OCer. (Or a CCer for that matter.)
    As I pointed out before, criminals are by and large, cowards. Short of the attacker being a psychopath, there would be no significant gain for the increased risk in attacking a LAC OCer (or CCer) unless they were in the way of, or carrying something specific that the criminal wanted.

    The mass majority of these types of robberies in America are smash and grab (in and out as quick as possible) or they overwhelm by numbers and force. Criminals themselves have stated almost unanimously that they fear a citizen carrying a gun far more than they fear the police. Corrilation? I believe so.

    In the event that an OCer was on scene and the unlikly event that a criminal even noticed he had a gun (as opposed to the criminal identifing it as a cell phone, multi tool, PDA, ect., at a glance) unless the OCer was infact the target itself, he most likely would not be put in the position of being attacked in such a manner.

    "An unhesitating, suprising, direct and vicious attack at face to face range like Finley used..." would likely take out RoboCop.

    The point here is not to examine the effectivness of the attack, but given all circumstances and motives, who the target of such an attack would be. The bystandard that the criminal is not even really focused on? OR the COP/GUARD/EMPLOYEE standing in the way of the prize.



  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    398

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    FMCDH wrote:
    Although it has been pointed out that this crime happened so fast that no LAC could possibly have reacted in time to prevent it, let it not be forgotten that this could have turned into a much worse situation should the assailants have decided to open fire on any "witnesses" or decided that the bag of money they had murdered an innocent man for, just wasn't enough.
    Another thing to tease out of this brutal killing by Calvin Finley is that his methodology for killing the guard would also work for any other visibly armed person, such as a LACOCer out in public.

    An unhesitating, surprising, direct and vicious attack atface to face rangelike Finley used will take out an OCer. (Or a CCer for that matter.)
    The methodology might work to defeat an OC'er, but it would also work against 99.99999% of the people in this world (only exceptions are heavily guarded individuals like the president). So making it an OC thing is just stupid. You are not made MORE vulnerable to this kind of attack because you OC, and at WORST being openly armed will make it far less likely on average you will be attacked.

    Also, if you know anything about the case you would know that this robbery only took place AFTER an insider learned how much money there was to make and figured out the best time to attack. So there was motive and a specific plan.

    So your argument is only relevant if their is a motive and plan for doing this to an OC'er, which is not horribly likely unless there is a personal motive. It is not like OC'ers are typically carrying 10's of thousands of dollars on them.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,327

    Post imported post

    What on earth is at about the Washington forum that makes HankT want to hang out here?



  7. #7
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    FMCDH wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    Another thing to tease out of this brutal killing by Calvin Finley is that his methodology for killing the guard would also work for any other visibly armed person, such as a LACOCer out in public.

    An unhesitating, surprising, direct and vicious attack atface to face rangelike Finley used will take out an OCer. (Or a CCer for that matter.)
    As I pointed out before, criminals are by and large, cowards. Short of the attacker being a psychopath, there would be no significant gain for the increased risk in attacking a LAC OCer (or CCer) unless they were in the way of, or carrying something specific that the criminal wanted.

    Calvin Finley is not a coward, then? Or is he a psychopath?

    I agree that Finley would not have any significant gain by shooting a surprised LAC OCer (or CCer) at the time of the robberty. But I wasn't suggesting that in any way. I was suggesting that, ingeneral,Finley's methodology would be very effective against any OCer (or CCer)--independent of the armored car robbery setting.



    FMCDH wrote:
    The mass majority of these types of robberies in America are smash and grab (in and out as quick as possible) or they overwhelm by numbers and force. Criminals themselves have stated almost unanimously that they fear a citizen carrying a gun far more than they fear the police. Corrilation? I believe so.
    I don't think this is plausible. Though I'm willing to be persuaded by data or citation. Citizens are attacked physically A LOT more frequently than cops are in this country.




    FMCDH wrote:
    In the event that an OCer was on scene and the unlikly event that a criminal even noticed he had a gun (as opposed to the criminal identifing it as a cell phone, multi tool, PDA, ect., at a glance) unless the OCer was infact the target itself, he most likely would not be put in the position of being attacked in such a manner.
    As said above, I wasn't thinking about the OCer at the scene of a robbery,e.g., an armored car guard robbery. I was trying to tease out what the Finley methodology could mean in other situations. Frankly, I was thinking of the perennial question of just exactly how vulnerableis an OCer to a potential threat from somewhere, out there, in the public space environment?

    After thinking about it some more, I've come to the conclusion that the truth is probably that the Findley method should be of more concern to OCers (eventually) than to, say, cops. Or CCers. But probably not armed armored car guards...



    FMCDH wrote:

    "An unhesitating, suprising, direct and vicious attack at face to face range like Finley used..." would likely take out RoboCop.

    The point here is not to examine the effectivness of the attack, but given all circumstances and motives, who the target of such an attack would be. The bystandard that the criminal is not even really focused on? OR the COP/GUARD/EMPLOYEE standing in the way of the prize.
    No. That's not true. I'm kind of uninterested in the armored car guard attack example. It's pretty simple and assimilable.

    But the Finley method, now proven to happen,is replicable to other criminal attacks. Including against an OCer who is not prepared for it....

    Of course, other questions come up in the line of thought I'm suggesting. Such as, "Why would a perp Finley an OCer?" Or"A perp would be more likely to Finley a CCer, woudn't he?" Etcetera, etcetera. That's much moreinteresting.






  8. #8
    Regular Member Ajetpilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Olalla, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,410

    Post imported post

    kparker wrote:
    What on earth is at about the Washington forum that makes HankT want to hang out here?

    Excellent question. Maybe he doesn't feel welcome in his own state's forum. Imagine that.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Taco-Ma, Washington, USA
    Posts
    309

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    FMCDH wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    Another thing to tease out of this brutal killing by Calvin Finley is that his methodology for killing the guard would also work for any other visibly armed person, such as a LACOCer out in public.

    An unhesitating, surprising, direct and vicious attack atface to face rangelike Finley used will take out an OCer. (Or a CCer for that matter.)
    As I pointed out before, criminals are by and large, cowards. Short of the attacker being a psychopath, there would be no significant gain for the increased risk in attacking a LAC OCer (or CCer) unless they were in the way of, or carrying something specific that the criminal wanted.

    Calvin Finley is not a coward, then? Or is he a psychopath?

    I agree that Finley would not have any significant gain by shooting a surprised LAC OCer (or CCer) at the time of the robberty. But I wasn't suggesting that in any way. I was suggesting that, ingeneral,Finley's methodology would be very effective against any OCer (or CCer)--independent of the armored car robbery setting.



    FMCDH wrote:
    The mass majority of these types of robberies in America are smash and grab (in and out as quick as possible) or they overwhelm by numbers and force. Criminals themselves have stated almost unanimously that they fear a citizen carrying a gun far more than they fear the police. Corrilation? I believe so.
    I don't think this is plausible. Though I'm willing to be persuaded by data or citation. Citizens are attacked physically A LOT more frequently than cops are in this country.




    FMCDH wrote:
    In the event that an OCer was on scene and the unlikly event that a criminal even noticed he had a gun (as opposed to the criminal identifing it as a cell phone, multi tool, PDA, ect., at a glance) unless the OCer was infact the target itself, he most likely would not be put in the position of being attacked in such a manner.
    As said above, I wasn't thinking about the OCer at the scene of a robbery,e.g., an armored car guard robbery. I was trying to tease out what the Finley methodology could mean in other situations. Frankly, I was thinking of the perennial question of just exactly how vulnerableis an OCer to a potential threat from somewhere, out there, in the public space environment?

    After thinking about it some more, I've come to the conclusion that the truth is probably that the Findley method should be of more concern to OCers (eventually) than to, say, cops. Or CCers. But probably not armed armored car guards...



    FMCDH wrote:

    "An unhesitating, suprising, direct and vicious attack at face to face range like Finley used..." would likely take out RoboCop.

    The point here is not to examine the effectivness of the attack, but given all circumstances and motives, who the target of such an attack would be. The bystandard that the criminal is not even really focused on? OR the COP/GUARD/EMPLOYEE standing in the way of the prize.
    No. That's not true. I'm kind of uninterested in the armored car guard attack example. It's pretty simple and assimilable.

    But the Finley method, now proven to happen,is replicable to other criminal attacks. Including against an OCer who is not prepared for it....

    Of course, other questions come up in the line of thought I'm suggesting. Such as, "Why would a perp Finley an OCer?" Or"A perp would be more likely to Finley a CCer, woudn't he?" Etcetera, etcetera. That's much moreinteresting.




    Let's not make that pile of excrement famous by even entertaining the thought of naming a vicious assault after him. His name should be forgotten as he should be after his execution. There is no rehabilitation for someone like this, he should be put down like a rabid dog.
    When the **** hits the fan, ask yourself: What Would Bugly Do?

  10. #10
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043

    Post imported post

    bugly wrote:
    Let's not make that pile of excrement famous by even entertaining the thought of naming a vicious assault after him. His name should be forgotten as he should be after his execution. There is no rehabilitation for someone like this, he should be put down like a rabid dog.
    Yea...I was gonna ask why he kept using that term, but figured it best not to encourage him.

    He (who shall not be named) deserves no such recognition or remembrance. He and his accomplice should be executed and forgotten as the murdering cowards they are.

    Yes, they were cowards.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Taco-Ma, Washington, USA
    Posts
    309

    Post imported post

    FMCDH wrote:
    bugly wrote:
    Let's not make that pile of excrement famous by even entertaining the thought of naming a vicious assault after him. His name should be forgotten as he should be after his execution. There is no rehabilitation for someone like this, he should be put down like a rabid dog.
    Yea...I was gonna ask why he kept using that term, but figured it best not to encourage him.

    He (who shall not be named) deserves no such recognition or remembrance. He and his accomplice should be executed and forgotten as the murdering cowards they are.

    Yes, they were cowards.
    To invoke a term I rarely use; amen.
    When the **** hits the fan, ask yourself: What Would Bugly Do?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •